U Turn

[vetran]

well when you make decisions publicly so stupid that you have to reconsider them then a U-turn makes you look idiotic.

They needed to push the base tax allowance up, minimum wage up and remove vat on energy (in the background tell the energy companies to behave). Job done.

Leave the bankers bonus & 45% tax alone (while people aren't looking fix that with some grants for new business etc.).

[d000hg]

So stress testing ideas before putting them to a vote is a bad idea?

Yes, obviously. It makes the government look indecisive and fickle. If they want to stress-test it, maybe run it past the party first so they can withdraw the clearly bonkers parts.
Polls show a direct link between this sort of thing and loss of support which is empirically rather than subjectively Bad for the party.

I don't know what exactly you do for work but if your way of planning was to throw out a half-baked, un-tested plan "this is what we're going to do" and then wait for everyone to point out you haven't done any sort of thorough analysis and it's useless before withdrawing it in the face of total revolt, you probably wouldn't be considered good at your job.
You might spit-ball those sort of ideas to gauge initial thoughts but announcing a (Kwasi) Budget is not something you are supposed to back-track on, that's supposed to be the result of analysis and review not the first step.

[malvolio]

Yes, obviously. It makes the government look indecisive and fickle. If they want to stress-test it, maybe run it past the party first so they can withdraw the clearly bonkers parts.
Polls show a direct link between this sort of thing and loss of support which is empirically rather than subjectively Bad for the party.

I don't know what exactly you do for work but if your way of planning was to throw out a half-baked, un-tested plan "this is what we're going to do" and then wait for everyone to point out you haven't done any sort of thorough analysis and it's useless before withdrawing it in the face of total revolt, you probably wouldn't be considered good at your job.
You might spit-ball those sort of ideas to gauge initial thoughts but announcing a (Kwasi) Budget is not something you are supposed to back-track on, that's supposed to be the result of analysis and review not the first step.

What I did was work out detailed architectural service designs for entire IT and business departments or multimillion pound migrations. I understand planning and needs analysis. So leave out the ad hominems when you have no idea what people can and can't do.

The plans Truss was implementing were trailed all through her leadership campaign, so they were hardly news. The over reaction from the MPs was hardly justified.

The "not costed" bit was also untrue. She was clear that the short to medium term plan was to boost the economy so in time - say two years or so - they would pay for themselves. That was a pure monetary. The market reacted on the basis of the hysteria from the MPs and the chance of making money against the pound, not from any particualarly major issue with the plan itself.

What was wrong was dropping it in one fell swoop - Thatcher the exact same thing but spent two years or so implementing it - thereby scaring the little children in the House. She had two years at the top of the Treasury so you would hope she at least had a grasp of how such things should have been done.

[d000hg]

What I did was work out detailed architectural service designs for entire IT and business departments or multimillion pound migrations. I understand planning and needs analysis. So leave out the ad hominems when you have no idea what people can and can't do.

Perhaps you should make more effort reading before going off on a tantrum. You have it 100% backwards - I was making the very point assuming you DON'T do that as an example. If you do detailed planning then why do you think the PM should throw crazy ideas at the public and see what sticks? Is this a government or a reality TV show?

The plans Truss was implementing were trailed all through her leadership campaign, so they were hardly news. The over reaction from the MPs was hardly justified.

No they weren't. THat's why so many MPs were cross with her for immediately going totally off-piste with massive changes.

The "not costed" bit was also untrue. She was clear that the short to medium term plan was to boost the economy so in time - say two years or so - they would pay for themselves. That was a pure monetary. The market reacted on the basis of the hysteria from the MPs and the chance of making money against the pound, not from any particualarly major issue with the plan itself.

The market doesn't react based on MPs' stupid ideas or it would be a total yo-yo 24/7. The IMF doesn't write the PM a personal letter without good reason.
She hasn't costed it. She has planned to fund it by gigantic increases in borrowing on the assumption "growth will sort it". She hasn't detailed how that will happen she has simply said it will... which people who actually make a job out of economics are deeply dubious about. In the meantime, all that extra borrowing is now a LOT more expensive than it was when announced 2 weeks back.

What was wrong was dropping it in one fell swoop - Thatcher the exact same thing but spent two years or so implementing it - thereby scaring the little children in the House. She had two years at the top of the Treasury so you would hope she at least had a grasp of how such things should have been done.

Well quite. But that's the problem. She clearly has no idea how to do anything. She has a piece of paper with 'Now' and 'Low tax high growth' written on it and has just drawn a line on it without the slightest understanding a)how to get there b)how to sell it to her party. You can't play that like it's a small detail, when it has put the entire economy at risk. Last time this happened it took 15 years to get over the shambles from one bad day.

Conservatism doesn't rely on low taxes paid for by borrowing, or sweeping radical changes. It means gradual change applied in a rational, reasonable way based on some idealistic goal.

[malvolio]

Perhaps you should make more effort reading before going off on a tantrum.

[/QUOTE]

I stopped reading when you started throwing insults about my competency around. Although you seem to agree with my actual point.

[SueEllen]

I stopped reading when you started throwing insults about my competency around. Although you seem to agree with my actual point.


[/QUOTE]

Gosh what a snowflake!

[Zigenare]

Gosh what a snowflake!

Oh, the ironing!

[malvolio]

I am many things, some of them probably a bit old-fashioned, but nobody would ever describe me as a snowflake. I will debate fact and opinion all day, I will not tolerate being insulted, even indirectly. Just occasionally, I snap back.

[d000hg]

I stopped reading when you started throwing insults about my competency around.

Although you seem to agree with my actual point.

I didn't make any insults or comments of any sort about your competency. Here's enough people here who are keen to insult you without inventing more . And no, I disagree with your point strongly. Now I AM starting to question your competency since your work presumably involves reading things....

Anyway enough on that... are you still claiming the government is acting effectively? Presumably we were just "stress testing" the Chancellor; let him do a budget and if he fecks up the entire country, sack him for the next one. No problem, they saw a problem and they addressed it right?

[DealorNoDeal]

You're wasting your time. Amongst other things , Mal is a dyed-in-the-wool Tory.